Today Detroit, tomorrow the USA, next The World?

Two weeks ago, the City of Detroit filed for Chapter 9 bankruptcy.

Detroit has a proud manufacturing heritage.  Once, it was the centre of the US automobile manufacturing industry.  Detroit was apparently top of the Nazis strategic bombing targets due to the amount of munitions manufactured there during World War II.

 

B52 Bombers being produced at the Ford 

Willow Run production plant in Detroit.

What is the reason for the collapse of Detroit finances?

This is from Bill Roberts, on behalf of the LaRouche Policy Committee:

"What’s going on in Detroit is the type of blatantly
fascist bail-in policy spelled out in Title II of the 2010
Dodd-Frank financial reform bill, which creates a topdown
authority by which the “systemically important”
global banks can commence a Cyprus-style default on
depositors’ accounts. It also reflects what JPMorgan
has openly called for, in a 16-page document published
May 18, in which they brag that a top-down, unified
bankers dictatorship over Europe is already halfway
complete, and that the only thing standing in the way is
anti-fascist, pro-democratic constitutions in certain European
nations."

It seems to me that Human Civilisation is going backwards - I don't see how it can be argued otherwise.

The question is: is this a natural decline or is it by design?

My belief is that it is the symptom of the Imperial/Oligarchical grip on Human affairs the world over.  They wreak destruction by:

• Relegating Humans to the status of animals.
• Using Malthusian ideas to argue that population growth will cause resource depletion to a point where we are threatened with extinction, without taking any account of Human creativity, advances in technology or resources yet unknown.
• Imposing a monetary economic system where money is merely a commodity, regulated and controlled by corrupt banks instead of being controlled by sovereign national governments.  Real money should represent a physical, productive economy; their fiat money does not.
• Promoting policies such as "environmentalism" which relegates Human activity as damaging to the environment and seeks to eradicate much needed energy sources such as nuclear power.
• Using economic organisations such as the IMF and the World Bank to plunder natural resources of sovereign nations.
• Ensuring the education of citizens is of poor quality (question: what sufficiently educated individual would subscribe to the idea that a hereditary monarchy has any place in today's society?).  

Human potential is unknown.  Does anybody really know of what we are capable?

Under the Oligarchs, the majority of us will starve to death as what little productive enterprise we have left is shut-down in the name of the "environment".

Under the philosophy of individuals like Lydon LaRouche, we could, with some hard work, live in a golden age of prosperity and peace.

You choose...

 

Good Versus Evil: The New World Order

You can read a lot on the Internet about the "New World Order" and what it represents.

In my opinion, what is meant by this term is nothing new; it represents a very old world order whose time is running out but that is desperately clinging on to power via its control of the world financial system.

We mind has recently been opened by reading the work of Lyndon LaRouche.  I now realise that there are two known systems of running Human affairs, the Republican system and the Oligarchical system.

Oligarchy (from Greek ὀλιγαρχία (oligarkhía); from ὀλίγος (olígos), meaning "few", and ἄρχω (arkho), meaning "to rule or to command")^[1][2][3] is a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with a small number of people. These people could be distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, education, corporate, or military control.


re·pub·lic  /riˈpəblik/ Noun / A state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president.

I would argue that most developed nations are ruled by an trans-national oligarchy, which desire to extend their control over the globe by covert means.


I am currently reading Webster Tarpley's "George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography".  Tarpley apparently either does or did support LaRouche's way of thinking.  In Chapter 10, for me he sums up the situation perfectly.  He writes:

For oligarchs...are well aware that there are only two ways to organise human affairs, namely the republican and the oligarchical modes. The republican mode depends upon the presence of citizens– well educated, technology-oriented, mature, and courageous people who are willing to think for themselves. Oligarchical forms function best in the presence of a culturally pessimistic, hedonist, superstitious mass of passive witnesses to the passing scene.

Does the oligarchical form defined above sound eerily like life today?

He describes the type of World oligarchs wish to see:

For the Anglo-American finance oligarchs, the leading problems of the world then as now could be summed up under the headings of overpopulation, especially among the non-white ethnic groups of the planet, and industrial pollution. The remedies, then as now, were to be sought in limiting population growth, or better yet reducing the existing population wherever possible, while at the same time shutting down industry. In this way the oligarchs sought to return to their bucolic and medieval dream world, and especially to a degraded and servile mass psychology agreeable to oligarchical forms of domination.

Thus, at the end of the 1960′s, London financiers and their Wall Street counterparts made available abundant foundation funding for such projects as the Triple Revolution, which proposed the now- accomplished transition from a productive society to a post-industrial society, and the 1968 founding of the Club of Rome with its absurd “Limits to growth” hoax of a few years later, the international flagship for the Malthusian revival. What the oligarchy had in mind was not just a minor adjustment of the Zeitgeist: the greening of the western cultural paradigm made mandatory the quick erosion of the imperatives of subduing and dominating nature contained in the first book of Genesis, the demolition of the beliefs in education, science and progress which had animated the philosophy and nation building of St. Augustine, Charlemagne, the Italian Renaissance, Leibnitz, Franklin, and the American Revolution.

 We learn more about the clash between Republicanism (good) and Oligarchy (evil), and why Oligarchy fears Republicanism in the following paragraphs:

The economics of Malthus, the Club of Rome, and of Yale economist George Bush lead inexorably to world depression and an economic breakdown crisis so severe as to put the future prospects of world civilisation itself into the gravest jeopardy. Bush’s most fanatically held beliefs concerning Anglo-Saxon race superiority are equally bankrupt and grotesque. Human beings have no genetic-racial identity. Human beings belong to cultures, which are learned as children are reared in the home and educated in schools, but which have nothing to do with heredity or blood, as the American experience itself in its better moments most impressively documents. Indeed, there is no such thing as a race or breed among humans as these categories exist among dogs and horses. Among these animals, race or breed defines a fixed repertoire of behaviour and reaction, a fixed mental disposition which rules out most changes that education might bring. Among human beings, it is just the opposite: any child of whatever colour or ethnic background, if placed as an infant in a family of a different colour and language, will invariably be accultured into the civilisation of the new family. This reflects the universality of the human personality beyond all distinctions of race, colour, religion, culture, and nationality, and proves the thesis of the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal. The universality of apostolic Christianity as a world religion seeking to reach out to all ethnic groups on the planet without exception is expressed in the idea that each and every concrete human individual is very practically the living image of God, and no difference of colour or “race” can change this in the slightest.

Oligarchical thinking rejects all this. Oligarchs have historically been obsessed with justifying and perpetuating the irrational and destructive domination of a feudal aristocracy, generally in the form of a titled nobility ruling through usurious banking practises, secret intelligence agencies, and militarism, at the expense of the progress of humanity. If the human personality is indeed universal, then there is no such thing as an hereditary aristocracy, and the concept of oligarchy itself is in big trouble. But feudal aristocrats, breeding horses and dogs as their status symbols, are often imbecilic enough to think that they have become authorities on human genetics.

What rational, properly educated Human Being would rank someone born into a so-called "Royal Family" as superior to someone who is not?

Sadly, we have seen in recent days in the UK that a proportion of the population are still hypnotised by the attraction of Royalty.

If you are interested in how life could be arranged under Republican thinking, I advise you to read LaRouche.

Friend of Humanity 1: Jim Garrison

We interrupt our examination of all things Rothschild for a word from Jim Garrison.

In case you have been in hiding for the last 50 years, Jim Garrison did his level best to get to the truth of the Kennedy assassination.

Did he succeed?

No.

Does it matter?

No.

He tried to do the right thing when all around him were willing him to fail.

As you listen, ask yourself this:

How many other "fairy tales" have we been told by the establishment?

(Clue: 9/11 was perpetrated by fanatical Muslims without any assistance or collusion from outside governments or security services).

 

Enemies of Humanity 6: The Rothschilds

The Rothschild family describe themselves as:

"Famous for their banking activities, the Rothschild family is also known for their achievements as winemakers, collectors and as significant charitable benefactors."

However, amongst those commentators that view bankers as a parasite afflicting Mankind, they are despised.

The history of banking is an interesting one.  Wikipedia's page is instructional in that it illustrates (in as many words) that modern banking developed out of greed.  Goldsmiths, who charged clients to hold their gold safe found that, instead of sitting on idle gold, they could loan it out at interest to businesses and governments.  So profitable was this, that they actively solicited deposits by offering interest to depositors.  Not only this, but they found that the paper receipts for the gold were being passed between individuals, in lieu of payment in gold.

These fledgling bankers soon found that only a small percentage of the gold held by them was ever withdrawn by the depositor.  This led to them lending many multiples of the gold they held to borrowers in the form of paper receipts.  Fractional reserve banking was born.

Lending something you don't have, on the promise of payment in gold that you don't hold?

Does that sound immoral or, even, something that should be illegal?

Wikipedia also points out that this system introduced a new type of "money" into the economy, one not based on real goods or real economic activity but based on debt.

It also gives our friends, the Rothschild family, a mention by stating:

   "1800 – The Jewish Rothschild family establishes Euro-wide banking."

 Part 2 to follow...

Enemies of Humanity 5: Henry Kissinger

What is Glass-Steagall?

The US Banking Act of 1933 is often known as the "Glass-Steagall" Act, after Senator Carter Glass and Representative Henry B. Steagall, the co-sponsors of the Bill.

Glass-Steagall sought to separate commercial and investment banking which, its proponents claimed, would help prevent instability in the banking sector, particularly the 1929 "crash", where banks used customer deposits to invest in high risk securities.

From the 1960's, banks began to find loopholes in the Act, effectively negating the Act until it was finally repealed in 1999.  Proponents of Glass-Steagall claim that this directly resulted in the banking crash of 2007-8, felt around the World.

This is from www.larouchepac.com:

How It Works

Since 1999, banks have been allowed to use commercial deposits and assets as fuel for securities trading on the derivatives market.
Because commercial and speculative assets are so heavily comingled, the government is forced to protect the assets of banks making risky bets through near perpetual bailouts and purchasing of toxic debt.

It was the derivatives bubble that blew up the system and bankrupted the US banks in the 2007-2008 crash.

1. Commercial Banking institutions have one year to divest themselves of all non-commercial banking units, with no cross management or ownership between commercial and non-commercial units.
2. Commercial Banks are barred from using more than 2% of its capital for the creation, sale, or distribution of securities (certain bank-qualified securities are exempted)
3. Prevents Commercial Banks from loaning their commercial deposits into such vehicals as would support the creation and circulation of securities.
4. No securities of low or potentially low value can be placed by a bank into its insured commercial bank units.
* Adds provision stating Glass-Steagall is the preeminant regulator of the banks, limiting banks from putting its depositors and shareholders at risk.

Glass-Steagall forces separation of commercial from investment banks, it ends Too Big To Fail, bars government bailouts, and will stop the onset of hyperinflation.

There is now a move to bring back Glass-Steagall,    

Notice how the closing argument of the interviewer is to the effect that as there's little chance (in their opinion) of getting the bill through, there is therefore no point in pursuing it.

Is there any chance that banks, who stand to lose from the re-introduction of Glass-Steagall, have any influence over news and media outlets?

 

The Mass Media and Politics: an Analysis of Influence

 

 

 

Enemies of Humanity 4: The Globalists

The entire gamut of the World's problems can be summed up in one word: Globalism.

What is Globalism?

The Globalists are a conglomerate of individuals, interest groups and large corporations who actively seek to eliminate all countries to create a global border-less society so that they can centralize, reduce and standardize all economies, production and the processing of natural resources so that they can directly control, manipulate and influence the decisions we make to ensure they maintain their power, control, wealth and historical influence.

Source: Andrew Puhanic - The Globalist Report

The Renaissance was a frightening time if you were part of the feudal elite, the unelected hereditary rulers of the Human Race (e.g. monarchies).

Philosophers such as Leibniz put forward a doctrine of Humanism, which placed Mankind as the ultimate expression of nature and pronounced Human Life as sacred.  Humanism promoted rational thought over blind faith and dogma.  Their ideas touched on many areas of Human activity, including politics and economics.  A key tenet of their thinking was that an increasing national population, educated to a high standard, was in a Nation's best interests economically and culturally.

These ideas profoundly influenced individuals such as Benjamin Franklin and became the core principles behind the founding of the US Republic.

The feudal elite foresaw that an educated, rational population, which placed a priority on Human life and happiness, would never tolerate irrational institutions such as monarchies and their empires (occupation of sovereign nations by force with the goal of exploiting their natural resources).

Renaissance thinking was countered by promoting individuals such as Malthus, who came up with the idea the an increasing world population would use up natural resources leading to catastrophe.

These pessimistic philosophies, which sought to counter the enlightened thinkers of the Renaissance, have found their modern epitome in Globalism.  

Much of their recent activity has been based around theories that Human activity is intrinsically damaging to the planet (e,g, climate change).  This is a huge subject but this article seeks to counter that argument.  

What do the Globalists want?

World Governance by unelected bodies (controlled by them).

A Fascist economic system (wealth held in private hands but distributed via collectivism).

World Population Reduction (to under 1 billion).

Return to a post-industrial feudalism.          

Remember the quote from Orwell's 1984?

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—for ever.”

Is that what you want?

Results of Globalism (from aangirfan):

Detroit: Dead City.